Michigan Votes Forum

Discuss issues, ideas and legislation related to the Great Lake State.
Welcome to Michigan Votes Forum Sign in | Join | Help
in Search
Latest post 04-14-2012 1:41 PM by TaterSalad. 72 replies.
Page 1 of 2 (73 items) 1 2 Next >
Sort Posts: Previous Next
  • 01-01-2001 12:00 AM

    2011 House Bill 4152 (Limit certain automatic government union employee pay hikes )

    Introduced in the House on January 26, 2011, to establish that when a government employee union contract has expired and no replacement has been negotiated, any seniority-based automatic pay hikes for individual employees (“step increases”) may not occur. Also, that any increase in health benefit costs above the former contract be borne by the employee, and establish that the wages and benefits under a new contract may be made retroactive to the expiration date of the old one

    The vote was 63 in favor, 47 opposed and 0 not voting

    (House Roll Call 32 at House Journal 0)

    Click here to view bill details.
  • 03-18-2011 5:12 PM In reply to

    Re: 2011 House Bill 4152 (Limit certain automatic government union employee pay hikes )

    Eliminate unions in government. They are not needed.

  • 03-18-2011 7:49 PM In reply to

    Re: 2011 House Bill 4152 (Limit certain automatic government union employee pay hikes )

     SB 4152 goes well beyond "in government".  In fact, it's primarily designed to deal with school districts.  It essentially removes all incentive for employers to negotiate in good faith under a timeline because their employees' compensation in all areas remains the same, and they all lose the step increases that they would have received under their current contract.  It's especially bad for teachers who have worked toward improving their skill levels. degrees, or certifications, as it nullifies any raises they may have qualified for.  BTW, they pay for those classes out of pocket, as well as for updating their certification and paying for all of their continuing education credits, all of which are mandated, and none of which they are compensated for,,,

  • 03-19-2011 1:05 PM In reply to

    Re: 2011 House Bill 4152 (Limit certain automatic government union employee pay hikes )

     This bill does much to reverse the trend of increased wages and benefits paid for by the taxpayer for decades.  It's a start, but as long as we maintain the mandatory Arbitration rules that allow for the arbitor to ignore the economy and require that taxes be raised in order to pay for increases, we are dead in the water.  Michigan is BROKE, and can no longer afford public sector unions controlling our tax rates and base.  This is the overwhelming danger engendered in public unions, the fact that all negotiations center around how much the unrepresented third party - the taxpayer - will pay.  Raises should be based on performance, not mandatory continuing education credits and certifications.  Parents and local school boards should be the final arbiters of results, not the NLRB, union officials, or unelected State Department of Education bureaucrats.  One begins to wonder if all of this certification and continuing education is undertaken (at the teacher's expense) simply to increase one's paycheck, and not to improve performance.  Would teachers continue to attend and pay for these classes if they were not rewarded for it with pay increases? It's a value judgement that should be made locally.  As a first step, I support this legislation.

  • 03-22-2011 11:14 AM In reply to

    Re: 2011 House Bill 4152 (Limit certain automatic government union employee pay hikes )

    On the other hand, allowing the expired contract with steps and health care increases to remain in effect removes the incentive for the union to settle for a new contract in these challenging times.  When you know that whatever you'll get is going to be worse than what you've got now, why settle?  Instead the union drags the process on for months, enjoying benefits the employer can no longer afford, all the while complaining in the media that the employer won't negotiate in good faith.  This happens in private industry too.  A large local employer has been negotiating for over two years, and the union loudly proclaims how long they have been working without a contract.  However, they continue to fight over trivial issues because they know any offer they get will require them to contribute more towards their benefits or maybe even take a small hit to the sacred cow of seniority.  Bottom line -- they don't want to settle until they absolutely have to. 

  • 05-18-2011 7:57 PM In reply to

    Re: 2011 House Bill 4152 (Limit certain automatic government union employee pay hikes )

     

     "Unrepresented third party"......please prove that talking point.  It has been said over and over - but it makes absolutely NO SENSE!  Michigan is 49th out of 50th in teacher pay increases over the past 10 years. (Google it, find it on PEW RESEARCH site)  Every single person at a negotiations table is a tax-payer. Most of the time, ALL of the people at the negotiations table are parents of school-aged children.  New teachers in MY district bring home a whopping $350/week after TAXES (yes, they pay them), after the 3% toward health benefit for retirees, and after the 11.9% toward their pension.  Do you really believe they are making "too much".  That is SAD!  If you direspect teachers that much, I wonder who taught you to read and write?  Do you really believe teachers should be making a wage that is so low that it qualifies them as "living in poverty"?  

    Continuing education is done, at teacher's expense, because our $79,000/year plus benefits we could only dream about, part-time state politicians wrote bills that MANDATED that all teachers get 18 credit hours in their first 3 years and 3 credit hours every 6 years for the rest of their career. 

    Get educated on the facts before weighing in on the argument please. You sound like one of our uniformed politicians with an agenda.

  • 05-22-2011 4:33 PM In reply to

    Re: 2011 House Bill 4152 (Limit certain automatic government union employee pay hikes )

    This works both ways.  Corporations and school boards do not negotiate in good faith.  If the process were transparent so all of the cards were on the table perhaps trust could be built and equitible settlements reach.  It is not unusual for the organization to cry "poor" and then give themselve a big raise and better benefits.  Been there, seen that, many times.  But with the current legislation there is no reason for employers to settle.  This is not a level playing field and the rich get richer on the backs of the middle and working class.  Then end of democracy and embarking on a race to the bottom. 

    bellasmom:

    On the other hand, allowing the expired contract with steps and health care increases to remain in effect removes the incentive for the union to settle for a new contract in these challenging times.  When you know that whatever you'll get is going to be worse than what you've got now, why settle?  Instead the union drags the process on for months, enjoying benefits the employer can no longer afford, all the while complaining in the media that the employer won't negotiate in good faith.  This happens in private industry too.  A large local employer has been negotiating for over two years, and the union loudly proclaims how long they have been working without a contract.  However, they continue to fight over trivial issues because they know any offer they get will require them to contribute more towards their benefits or maybe even take a small hit to the sacred cow of seniority.  Bottom line -- they don't want to settle until they absolutely have to. 

     

     

  • 05-22-2011 4:54 PM In reply to

    Re: 2011 House Bill 4152 (Limit certain automatic government union employee pay hikes )

    CJLKAS:

     This bill does much to reverse the trend of increased wages and benefits paid for by the taxpayer for decades.  It's a start, but as long as we maintain the mandatory Arbitration rules that allow for the arbitor to ignore the economy and require that taxes be raised in order to pay for increases, we are dead in the water.  Michigan is BROKE, and can no longer afford public sector unions controlling our tax rates and base.  This is the overwhelming danger engendered in public unions, the fact that all negotiations center around how much the unrepresented third party - the taxpayer - will pay.  Raises should be based on performance, not mandatory continuing education credits and certifications.  Parents and local school boards should be the final arbiters of results, not the NLRB, union officials, or unelected State Department of Education bureaucrats.  One begins to wonder if all of this certification and continuing education is undertaken (at the teacher's expense) simply to increase one's paycheck, and not to improve performance.  Would teachers continue to attend and pay for these classes if they were not rewarded for it with pay increases? It's a value judgement that should be made locally.  As a first step, I support this legislation. 

     

    Another rant by by the uninformed.  All public services provided by government are paid for by the tax payer. roads and highways, prisons that make us feel safer, parks that provide recreation and relaxation, police and fire protection, elections.  School employees and public sector employees pay taxes also!  But, the wages and benefits have not kept up with inflation and taxes have not increased beyond what the law allows.  Sales taxes have not increased since Proposition A was passed.  Property tax increases only at the rate of inflation or 5% maximum.  Income tax has not increased.  What are you talking about? 

    Certification requirements are set by law.  The curriculum is set by the state.  Most public employees are underpaid when compared to the private sector employees when controlling for education and experience.  Most teachers I know attend many classes, workshops and seminars because they love what they are doing and want the latest information.  And for your information, the school fund is not broke, just shifted to give corporations a tax break; $1.8 billion!!!  That's my tax money also.

  • 08-10-2011 3:49 PM In reply to

    Re: 2011 House Bill 4152 (Limit certain automatic government union employee pay hikes )

    yoop2u:

     

     "Unrepresented third party"......please prove that talking point.  It has been said over and over - but it makes absolutely NO SENSE!  Michigan is 49th out of 50th in teacher pay increases over the past 10 years. (Google it, find it on PEW RESEARCH site)  Every single person at a negotiations table is a tax-payer. Most of the time, ALL of the people at the negotiations table are parents of school-aged children.  New teachers in MY district bring home a whopping $350/week after TAXES (yes, they pay them), after the 3% toward health benefit for retirees, and after the 11.9% toward their pension.  Do you really believe they are making "too much".  That is SAD!  If you direspect teachers that much, I wonder who taught you to read and write?  Do you really believe teachers should be making a wage that is so low that it qualifies them as "living in poverty"?  

    Continuing education is done, at teacher's expense, because our $79,000/year plus benefits we could only dream about, part-time state politicians wrote bills that MANDATED that all teachers get 18 credit hours in their first 3 years and 3 credit hours every 6 years for the rest of their career. 

    Get educated on the facts before weighing in on the argument please. You sound like one of our uniformed politicians with an agenda.

     

     The Michigan Department Of Education says the average teacher salary is $63,024.00 plus benifits, that sure is alot of deductions to get down to $350. a week. Maybe you should check you research.

     

  • 08-25-2011 2:29 AM In reply to

    Re: 2011 House Bill 4152 (Limit certain automatic government union employee pay hikes )

    What about teachers in small rural communities? They certainly aren't making that kind of money yet this bill will cost them the same as the teacher making this hypothetical $64,000 a year. Our starting wage is 1/2 of that. Our district just had two wonderful teachers leave because of the changes being forced on us. One moved to Texas and received a $10,000 increase in pay plus her benefits are basically the same as they have been in the past. the other is giving up teaching altogether. Keep up the "good work" the powers that be. We will end up with sub-standard teachers, police and fire fighters. You are creating many more problems than you are solving. And no, I am not a teacher, police officer, or fire fighter. I work in the private sector an am a member of our city council. Let the elected boards and councils take care of our own business. Oh, and I voted for some of these fools, I am embarrassed to say!

  • 08-25-2011 3:09 PM In reply to

    Re: 2011 House Bill 4152 (Limit certain automatic government union employee pay hikes )

     Excellent bill that should move forward in the system and get approved.  While the taxpayers who pay their wages and pensions for these government employees, our housing values have fallen to new lows bringing a loss of revenue to these communities.

     

  • 08-26-2011 7:47 AM In reply to

    Re: 2011 House Bill 4152 (Limit certain automatic government union employee pay hikes )

     Get as many friends and familey members as you can together in the next election and vote them out of office.  Snyder recall hasn't worked out to well so vote him out.  Our teachers need the voters help.

  • 08-26-2011 9:25 AM In reply to

    Re: 2011 House Bill 4152 (Limit certain automatic government union employee pay hikes )

    cuennin:
    SB 4152 goes well beyond "in government".  In fact, it's primarily designed to deal with school districts.

    I have news for you.  Schools are funded by taxes.  School are thus run by the government.  Employees of schools are government employees.

     

  • 08-26-2011 9:29 AM In reply to

    Re: 2011 House Bill 4152 (Limit certain automatic government union employee pay hikes )

    Frannie:
    Our teachers need the voters help.

    Our kids need better education.

     

  • 03-06-2012 8:01 PM In reply to

    Re: 2011 House Bill 4152 (Limit certain automatic government union employee pay hikes )

    This message is specifically for Marty the one who introduced this bill. I have been a public health worker for 14 out of my 19 years as a professional. I presently work for the Central Mi District Health Department as a Registered Dietitian. My basic job responsibilities include going into people's homes and counseling them on their various nutritional needs as well as their social/emotional needs. Unfortunately, I see a lot of bad things on a daily basis, i.e., dog *** in the home, medical marijuana in the homes where infants and children reside, chronic smoking without anyone working in the home. I still don't understand how people who have no job or receive no unemployment can afford to smoke 2 packs of cigarettes a day. This is approximately 300 dollars a month! Oh I do know how they afford it with the taxes I pay as a working individual. As a politician I am sure you know all about this "real world" stuff otherwise how would you be able to make any good judgments on policies for the welfare of the people. Surprisingly, I consider myself a republican and have voted this way for a number of years now, however when it comes down to it what does that really mean??? If you really want to control spending I would seriously consider looking at policies that continue to give out free money such as SSI for depression, instead of creating bills that limit the income of those contributing to the financial well being of society to help pay for the "less fortunate". Unfortunately, I work for a government agency that has a union and I am lumped in with other workers, who don't necessarily pull their weight, but let me ask you this: Should it be the governments role to dictate how much I make or should it be my boss/company? If you want to control waste in spending focus on perpetual abuse of the welfare system and recreate what it was intended to be a supplement not a limb.
  • 03-06-2012 8:04 PM In reply to

    Re: 2011 House Bill 4152 (Limit certain automatic government union employee pay hikes )

    Just FYI, my increase was 2% over 3 years. I figure with the cost of inflation I am still behind the 8 ball. Obviously, you work for a private enterprise (count yourself lucky), but remember the government employee still pays taxes for the people who abuse the system daily.
  • 03-06-2012 10:48 PM In reply to

    Re: 2011 House Bill 4152 (Limit certain automatic government union employee pay hikes )

     Do you think these "Union" members/employees should get a raise or should they go to jail.  liberals will argue it is a free country but the taxpayers are the ones getting hosed.  Funny thing how that 1% workds out when the liberals don't want to talk about it.

    http://sweetness-light.com/archive/nyc-longshoremen-make-over-400k-a-year

     

  • 03-07-2012 8:52 AM In reply to

    • gypsy
    • Top 10 Contributor
    • Joined on 03-19-2009

    Re: 2011 House Bill 4152 (Limit certain automatic government union employee pay hikes )

    If these "automatic pay hikes" were agreed to in a contract, they definitely should get them. Using the term automatic is an obvious attempt to make a contract provision sound unfair.
  • 03-07-2012 10:04 AM In reply to

    Re: 2011 House Bill 4152 (Limit certain automatic government union employee pay hikes )

    throw out the contracts only a fool would have signed them, communist activity on our streets and in our schools.
  • 03-07-2012 12:13 PM In reply to

    Re: 2011 House Bill 4152 (Limit certain automatic government union employee pay hikes )

     I'm not sure what you are saying exactly as I am a union employee and I don't think I should go to jail; and I do pay taxes.  I wish I wasn't part of a union but I have no choice through my work.  It really makes me angry that the dues I pay go for political campaigning.  The year Obama was elected I received daily calls from James Hoffa Jr. and believe me I did not vote for Obama!  I pd over $600.00 fro my crappy union all the while James Hoffa netted over 468,000 that year. 

  • 03-07-2012 1:16 PM In reply to

    Re: 2011 House Bill 4152 (Limit certain automatic government union employee pay hikes )

     DStauffer............you are entitled to the portion of your forced Union dues "back to you" when requested/demanded that is used for political purposes outside your Union.  Here is the case:

    http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/487/735/

    ............and "If" your state is a right to work state you can NOT be forced to pay Union dues that you do not want to pay.  It is voluntary which is the way it should be nationwide but it is left to each state to determine if they want it or not.  This is the reason why Toyota, Honda, Nissan and Kia have stayed in the red states and have even higher wages for their workers.  Total benefit packages and wages combined are similar in nature with the Big Three.  However, GM still is owned 33% by Obama.

     

  • 03-07-2012 10:25 PM In reply to

    Re: 2011 House Bill 4152 (Limit certain automatic government union employee pay hikes )

     

    Governor Snyder of Michigan has to go.  He and his Republican Congress are whimps and here is why:
     
     
    Please pas this on to every Michigan resident that you know!

     

  • 03-09-2012 10:03 AM In reply to

    Re: 2011 House Bill 4152 (Limit certain automatic government union employee pay hikes )

    tater - i read the article makes and this inappropiate action by granholm is one of those areas to be addressed by the right to work legislation in michigan. you need to support the republican party, whomever the GOP nomination is. Repeating the Ross Perot days will not be good for this country.
  • 03-09-2012 12:26 PM In reply to

    Re: 2011 House Bill 4152 (Limit certain automatic government union employee pay hikes )

     RTDB............right on!  I will support any Republican who gets the nomination just like the rest of the Tea Party.  If this nominee isn't what we like, we will hold our noses and still vote against Barack Obama who is a white hating racist. 

    As for the citizens still owning 33% of GM (a la Obama), couple that with the UAW's influence on the corporation and Captain Bull$hits influence on their decisions (chevy volt, where expansion takes place in what states) is still the problem  Then we have the bonsus's that are being paid to workers while the taxpayers who bailed this company out are still waiting for their money.  This is flat out wrong and in November the taxpayers will be reminded of this and vote accordingly.

     

  • 03-09-2012 12:57 PM In reply to

    Re: 2011 House Bill 4152 (Limit certain automatic government union employee pay hikes )

    Tatersalad - thanks, the candidate may not be the silver bullet however getting the party to re-establish it values is very important.
  • 03-15-2012 11:37 AM In reply to

    Re: 2011 House Bill 4152 (Limit certain automatic government union employee pay hikes )

     Public Unions:

    Be careful, be very careful and know what is being pushed in your schools.  Union teachers are NOW pushing Marxism on our kids and grand kids.  Here is the proof:
     

     

  • 03-15-2012 8:18 PM In reply to

    Re: 2011 House Bill 4152 (Limit certain automatic government union employee pay hikes )

     Who's mentally unstable to the point of being paranoid?  One teacher from Los Angeles and another from New York hardly justify the blanket statement intimating that all union teachers are teaching Marxism in schools, least of all in Michigan.   How do you make that leap from two (2) teachers to all union teachers??!!  Why do you read the trash those hate-mongers "report" on or, more to the the point, what makes you so gullible that you believe it?   

  • 03-22-2012 10:03 AM In reply to

    • gypsy
    • Top 10 Contributor
    • Joined on 03-19-2009

    Re: 2011 House Bill 4152 (Limit certain automatic government union employee pay hikes )

    You must excuse our tuber friend. The salad might have spoiled.
  • 03-23-2012 11:27 AM In reply to

    Re: 2011 House Bill 4152 (Limit certain automatic government union employee pay hikes )

  • 03-23-2012 12:07 PM In reply to

    • peppo
    • Top 50 Contributor
      Male
    • Joined on 03-10-2012

    Re: 2011 House Bill 4152 (Limit certain automatic government union employee pay hikes )

    harrynevus:

     Who's mentally unstable to the point of being paranoid?  One teacher from Los Angeles and another from New York hardly justify the blanket statement intimating that all union teachers are teaching Marxism in schools, least of all in Michigan.   How do you make that leap from two (2) teachers to all union teachers??!!  Why do you read the trash those hate-mongers "report" on or, more to the the point, what makes you so gullible that you believe it?   

    He is so ANTI union he can't see straight!!!  I bet he didn't give back his union wages/benefits when he worked for Millwright local 1102!! Or his union negotiated pension checks!!

  • 03-24-2012 7:30 AM In reply to

    Re: 2011 House Bill 4152 (Limit certain automatic government union employee pay hikes )

    Votes Admin:
    Introduced in the House on January 26, 2011, to establish that when a government employee union contract has expired and no replacement has been negotiated, any seniority-based automatic pay hikes for individual employees (“step increases”) may not occur. Also, that any increase in health benefit costs above the former contract be borne by the employee, and establish that the wages and benefits under a new contract may be made retroactive to the expiration date of the old one

    The vote was 63 in favor, 47 opposed and 0 not voting

    (House Roll Call 32 at House Journal 0)

    Click here to view bill details.
     

  • 03-24-2012 11:09 AM In reply to

    Re: 2011 House Bill 4152 (Limit certain automatic government union employee pay hikes )

     Excellent bill and we all hope it gets passed and very soon.

    No one should get any type of "automatic pay" or increases while there is NO contract negotiated, expecially when there is public taxpayers money involved.  This is a great piece of legislation.  Thanks!

     

  • 03-24-2012 2:23 PM In reply to

    Re: 2011 House Bill 4152 (Limit certain automatic government union employee pay hikes )

    This bill should be passed.

     

  • 03-24-2012 8:47 PM In reply to

    Re: 2011 House Bill 4152 (Limit certain automatic government union employee pay hikes )

    changeagent:
    This bill should be passed.

     

     Why should it be passed?

    When a negotiated union contract expires and a new contract hasn't been agreed to, the two parties agree to continue working under the provisions of the old contract until the new one is settled.  If that's what both parties have agreed to in the contract, and if the employees are working under the provisions of that contract, that's what they are entitled to.  That's simple Contract Law 101.  The employer has a legal obligation to abide by the terms of the contract.

  • 03-24-2012 8:49 PM In reply to

    Re: 2011 House Bill 4152 (Limit certain automatic government union employee pay hikes )

    gypsy:
    You must excuse our tuber friend. The salad might have spoiled.

     

     That's funny!  His mayonaise has gone bad!

  • 03-24-2012 10:25 PM In reply to

    Re: 2011 House Bill 4152 (Limit certain automatic government union employee pay hikes )

    Here is your typical Public Sector Union employee, better known as a parasite on the taxpayers wallet: http://moonbattery.com/?p=2062 The battle with Public Unions is about them delivering services at a cost that the taxpayers are "willing to afford". http://biggovernment.com/publius/2011/01/09/the-battle-ahead-public-sector-unions/

     

  • 03-25-2012 11:00 AM In reply to

    Re: 2011 House Bill 4152 (Limit certain automatic government union employee pay hikes )

    And as long as these parasites keep stuffing cabbage into the pockets of our so called representatives in Lansing, nothing will change.
  • 03-25-2012 11:07 AM In reply to

    Re: 2011 House Bill 4152 (Limit certain automatic government union employee pay hikes )

    MEA members are the most greedy of 'public servants'. And they work the least amount of hours for what they are paid in wages and (Cadillac) benefits.. In fact, right now they are on taxpayer funded Spring break. And look at the latest MEAP scores. Disgusting! Our kids are being cheated out of a good education and the taxpayers are being robbed!
  • 03-25-2012 7:19 PM In reply to

    Re: 2011 House Bill 4152 (Limit certain automatic government union employee pay hikes )

     Another know nothing spouting off garbage.  Teachers work more hours than in the classroom, about 8 to 14 hours a day, all summer and most of the so called vacation time.  They are underpaid for the amount of work, education and experience when compared to other workers, public and private.  Kids would do better in school if they have more support from home for doing good work, legislators were not alway mucking up the regulations and requirements and letting parents off the hook.  It is the private sector that is robbing our children of a good education and idoits like you.  The latest legislation dumbing down the requirements will only make the scores go lower and then idiots like you can squeal louder and try to give tax dollars to the profit of those who lie to the public that they can get better results when they are required to follow the same regulations and accept all children regardless of ability to learn or whether they come from dysfunctional families.  Place the blame where it belongs - to the private education sector who wants to suck off the tax dollar to line their own poctets.

  • 03-25-2012 7:27 PM In reply to

    Re: 2011 House Bill 4152 (Limit certain automatic government union employee pay hikes )

    The attack on public sector unions and all unions is a tactic to make sure there is no middle class.  We will all be working for the rich man for nothing, like the early days in the factories and mines and mines.  The real parasites in this society are those who contribute nothing be draw off profits because they already had money.  Public employees do work that most people thought was not worth spending money on, at least not personal money.  When it was realize the government was collecting taxes and that there was profit to be made by getting contracts to build roads, run mental hospitals and prisons, take over all types of work done by public sector workers,  the private sector said give us the tax money and we will pay works lower wages, skimp on materials, guarantee nothing and make a good profit for myself.  We will call all workers, but especially union workers unworthy of their pay.  But the real game is to have the greedy at the top and their lackies get even more money, tax dollars and otherwise. 

Page 1 of 2 (73 items) 1 2 Next >
Powered by Community Server (Commercial Edition), by Telligent Systems